- From: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 10:27:27 -0500
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Cameron Heavon-Jones <cmhjones@gmail.com>, Mirko Gustony <mirko.gustony@gmail.com>, thibault <thibault@miximum.fr>, public-html-comments@w3.org
following along my original approach of adding attributes to HTML.FORM that are converted to HTTP Headers[1], the HTML.FORM@prefer could be included, too. This would mean servers need to decide how to deal w/ this situation, too. [1] http://amundsen.com/examples/put-delete-forms/#added-attributes mca http://amundsen.com/blog/ http://twitter.com@mamund http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:24, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > On 2011-12-13 16:16, Cameron Heavon-Jones wrote: >> >> >> On 13/12/2011, at 3:09 PM, mike amundsen wrote: >> >>> Based on repeated comments about what this issue of what the browser >>> user-agent *expects* as a return for PUT/DELETE, I wonder if things >>> would go better if the Prefer header proposal was included in all >>> this. >>> >>> mca >>> http://amundsen.com/blog/ >>> http://twitter.com@mamund >>> http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me >>> >> >> Personally i don't agree with "Prefer" header but i stated this >> previously, as it is optional i just choose not to use it. >> >> If it satisfies concerns i have no problem referencing it as something >> people can use. > > > Well, to make this "work", we'd need to define a Preference token, and > mandate that the browser sends it. > > Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 13 December 2011 15:57:08 UTC